second amendment rather than hints at bashing the media. >> sounds like a crisis point for the nra. thank you for being on and filling us in on what your sources are telling you. that wraps it up for me. i'm headed to the white house. craig melvin. >> we'll see you then. thank you. craig melvin msnbc world headquarters in new york city. the stakes are higher. that is part of the message joe biden's team is rolling out today making the case that he is the most electable and it comes just as the leads in a national poll. >> we have to beat donald trump. joe biden is the strongest democrat to do the job. no one is more qualified. plus, backing down or hitting pause? the new report that the president is retreating from his pledge to pursue stronger background checks despite his insistent he is not. so, what changed his mind.

and clearly concern. the latest sign that the white house is getting even more nervous about the economy, despite public pock luimations that everything is fine. nothing to see here. could yet another tax cut be on the way? we'll dig into that in just a moment. we'll start with policies, polls and the power of television. it's how the 20/20 contenders are trying to leave their mark on iowa and beyond. vice president joe biden's campaign ad out today that plays up his electability and his ties to president obama. meanwhile, senator elizabeth warren just laid out her new plan to cut mass incarcerations in this country. it would do away with the crime bill that biden wrote. a new cnn national poll shows joe biden is up seven points since june. he is leading the next closer contender, bernie sanders, by 14 points. that same poll put senator kamala harris down losing 12

points in the last month. our road warriors are in iowa this morning. we'll start with you, sir. what is the biden strategy with this ad today in iowa? >> well, craig, here you see the vice president coming out swinging in this ad but not against his democratic opponents. focused on donald trump as he has been trying to do throughout the campaign. the biden campaign said they spent six figures to get this ad up to make the argument that he has been making all along. he is the most electable and the safest bet to beat donald trump. here is the core of this message boiled down in just a few seconds from that ad. take a listen. >> now, joe biden is running for president with a plan for america's future. to build on obama care. not scrap it. to make a record investment in america's schools. to lead the world on climate. to rebuild our alliances.

most of all, he'll restore the soul of the nation. >> two key things in that ad, craig. leaning on the vice president's service in the obama administration. a popular figure among democratic caucus goers in places like iowa and, second, the use of polls within the ad making the argument that biden is the best equipped to beat donald trump. everywhere i go in this country that remains the thing that democratic voters tell me. they may have strong preferences about certain candidates or others but at the end of the day they all want to beat donald trump. i think you'll see him overperform in these early state polls. >> restore the soul of the nation, garrett, is that going to be the new tagline of the campaign? >> it's been part, ironically, craig, that was meant to be part of the tagline from the word go. caught up fighting back kamala harris and chasing down the '94

crime bill, not able to make that argument consistently. that is the argument they wanted to make from the word go. set up high stakes and it is not your average presidential contest. when the stakes are that high, they feel the electability argument and if the soul of the nation is at stake, you can't play around with a candidate that you are not sure can beat donald trump or not. >> thousands of folks attended this campaign event for senator warren last night in st. paul, minnesota. there's a look at the crowd there. today she's out with her new plan on criminal justice reform. another plan from the senator from massachusetts. what more can you tell us about it? >> yeah, craig, there is the policy and then the politics of it. so, on policy this plan includes decriminalizing marijuana and ending for-profit prisons and then the main headline out of it getting rid of the 1994 crime bill. garrett mentioned it one of the things that joe biden has been

defending and elizabeth warren is just the latest candidate to pile on. she signaled she would be going after this bill last week. what she meant specifically by that. not necessarily a blanket repeal she is talking about, but she wants to get rid of the bulk of the things in the crime bill saving domestic violence protections and that is one of the things that biden and his allies turn to when they do defend the 1994 crime bill, things like the violence against women act. that elizabeth warren will keep. the rest of it, she says, she wants to get rid of. the thing i'm looking at especially towards the next debate, biden has been getting criticism for the 1994 crime bill, but bernie sanders. i'm looking to see if that is a new contrast we're going to see coming down the pipeline. >> let's talk about it, ali. both of them in the hawkeye state. let's bring in susan page washington bureau chief

podcast, your primary playlist. ladies, big thanks to both of you. susan, i'll start with you. this new biden ad, again, electability. yesterday his wife dr. jill biden was speaking in manchester, new hampshire, and she put it fairly plainly. here's what she said. >> you know, your candidate might be better on, i don't know, health care than joe is. but you have to look at who is going to win this election and maybe you have to swallow a little bit and say, okay, i sort of personally like so and so better. but your bottom line has to be that we have to beat trump. >> susan page, is that it? is that the perveiling view of the party at this point? put aside policy for now and focus on who can win. >> well, in the cnn poll you mentioned, 54% of democrats said it was important to choose the candidate with the best chance of beating president trump than it was choosing the candidate

who agreed with you most on issues. but this is a somewhat risky strategy for vice president biden to be pursuing because, for one thing, i think it's difficult to tell voters to vote for your candidate. that is an unusual argument to make. the other thing, another candidate could show electability by winning something. for instance, if another candidate won in iowa, that would do a lot of damage to vice president biden's argument that he is the one with the best chance to be elected. but at the moment, it's serving him well. certainly a double-digit lead in this new cnn poll. >> yeah. emily, the "des moines register" $2.5 million in iowa alone. what is the payoff for spending in iowa? when you spend that kind of money there in the hawkeye state, does that replace retail

politicking? >> nothing replaces retail politicking in iowa. iowa takes their role in vetting the presidential candidate extremely seriously. they want you in their living room, at their corn fair, at your neighbor's barbecue. nothing replaces that. i think what we see with the big tv spin ads is that people are seeing name recognition still matters a lot. a lot why we see biden and bernie at the top of the polls and holding that. for candidates that turns into national money when people are seeing reinforcement that they're doing well in the iowa polls. for every candidate what we're seeing is the support is pretty shallow. it's interesting to hear dr. biden say that people are looking for electability over their own policy positions so, plainly, because actually that is pretty much what we hear for most voters. they are not looking to fall in love with the candidate, they are looking to defeat donald trump. the support for any candidate is shallow. name i.d. matters a lot. >> some who have suggested that

the democrat iic montra is becoming more like the republican mantra has been for some time. fall in love or fall in line. ets easier to fall in line. susan, going back to the cnn poll. the other story here for me, joe biden's lead, yes. what may be just as more significant here, kamala harris' 12-point fall since june. what happened to the momentum that she had coming out of that first debate? >> you know, craig, i think this shows how powerful the debates have been. the first poll in june was taken where kamala harris did very well and joe biden stumbled. biden's number is suppressed in that first poll from what it would have been. the second poll taken from the second debate where biden recovered and kamala harris didn't handle that so smoothly. this shows that this next debate in september is, again, going to be something very important to

watch as the candidate, as the field starts to contract somewhat and the candidates continue. i certainly agree a lot of voters are not so firmly tied to any one candidate. they are still willing to change allegiances if somebody makes the case to them that they'd be the best president or the case that they are the one that could best beat president trump. >> we just heard from ali in iowa talk about senator warren's plan that would gut his '94 crime bill which joe biden has had to answer for repeatedly the last few months on the campaign trail. is this going to create some real sunlight between the two candidates and the two campaigns? >> criminal justice reform is interestingly an issue that has not been at the top tier of issues for democratic candidates in past presidential elections and primaries. but is this is cycle for a lot of reasons, one that we see terrible impact of the '94 crime bill, but, also because when we think about electability, it

really matters who's impacted. communities of color are disproportionately impact by the criminal justice system we have now and we know they need to show strong commitment to a candidate for them to be able to win the democratic primary. you cannot win south carolina and nevada or california for that matter without a strong coalition of communities of color. so, criminal justice reform is a place that biden can be hit, bernie can be hit and in many ways harris has a lot of vulnerability. and booker had actually had it as one of his earliest policy proposals out there. we've also seen proposals from buttigieg. try to show a lot of contrast. >> ladies, we enjoyed this conversation so much. we'd love for both of you to stick around, if you can. a familiar retreat, president trump appears to be backing down on stronger background checks, once again. but his aides insist he is just

hitting pause. i'll ask senator chris murphy about the likelihood that anything actually happens this time. plus, eyeing another tax cut. it's an idea that the white house is apparently floating to avert an economic slow down. the latest sign that the president might just be feeling the pressure over his best re-election advantage. zer at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero trust us. us kids are ready to take things into our own hands. don't think so? hold my pouch.

do your asthma symptoms ever hold you back? about 50% of people with severe asthma have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can allergic reactions.use.a e get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth,

and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

senate democrats trying to pass gun safety reform may be

facing a new hurdle. president trump is backing away from his promise to support background check legislation. >> we have to have meaningful background checks. mitch mcconnell is a good man and wants to do it very strongly and he wants to do background checks and i do, too. but i spoke with chris murphy, the senator, we had a very good conversation. we'll see what happens. we don't want to see crapeople owning guns and mental illness is something that people don't want to talk about. a lot of background checks approved over the years, so i'll have to see what it is. >> without president trump providing cover for republicans will democrats get enough support to pass a bill? i'm joined by the aforementioned senator from connecticut chris murphy. senator, thanks for your time as the president just indicated there, you had a conversation with him following the shootings in el paso and dayton. what is different between what

you're hearing now and what you heard from the president then? >> i'm not sure what is different. his latest set of comments on this issue were, you know, confusing to say the least. i did talk to him about a week ago. in that conversation he expressed support for working together with republicans and democrats to come up with a background checks bill that would extend the protections that right now apply mostly to guns that are sold in bricks and mortar stores but don't apply to online sales and to guns sold at gun shows around the country. i'm sure the nra and its allies are putting a lot of pressure on the president to back off and you are right that ultimately republicans in the senate are not going to vote for a background check's bill without the president's support for it, even though it is supported by 90% of its constituents. so, i will continue this week to try to work with the white house and with the president and see if we can set up a process by

which we can develop a strong bill that will save lives. i'm not sure that the president has fully walked away from the commitments he made privately and publicly from a week and a half ago and we'll see how the week plays out. >> did you get the sense based on your conversation with the president that he was, indeed, willing to lead on this? >> well, i think the president understands that he has to lead in order for this to pass the senate. i think the president understands that republicans are not going to step on any limb without cover from the executive branch. now, the president said he was willing to lead on background checks after the parkland shootings. he invited me and others to the white house. he put that meeting on television and he declared to the world that he was prepared to get a strong background checks reform bill done and walked into his office a day

later and everything changed. so, we have seen this before where the president made a commitment on background checks and then walked away from that commitment. i'm not willing to declare that he has walked away from that commitment, again, until i hear it directly from him. but i think he knows he has to be strong on this issue in order for republicans to step up in the senate. >> it's not just the president, as you know, also your senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, as well. widespread support for certain types of legislation. a new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll 89% of folks who were asked said they support congress expanding background checks to all firearm sales. 76% support these so-called red flag law. a federal red flag law. 62% said they favored banning the sale of assault weapons. why is there this apparent chasm between public opinion in what

senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is willing to do on this? >> so, it is a really complicated answer to that question because it makes no sense, right? you know, there's nothing in american politics today that enjoys 90% public support. background checks are more popular than grandma, apple pie, baseball, you name it. yet they can't get passed through congress. the reason is this perception of how powerful the gun lobby is that isn't really matched by reality. the mythology in the republican party that if you cross the nra you will lose a primary election or lose a general election against the democrat. that's just not true. it's never been true. the nra has never been as powerful as republicans think they are. today the nra is in absolute chaos. their board is in meltdown. people aren't signing up to be members of the nra and the way they used to. so, there is no risk in crossing the gun lobby today and there really wasn't much of a risk five or ten years ago.

but that perception of power the gun lobby has stops a lot of republicans from crossing that bridge and standing with the 90% of their constituents that want universal background checks. >> senator murphy really quickly. you said something that i found quite fascinating. perhaps that folks have been overstating the power of the gun lobby for some time now. how did that come to be? how did this myth come to exist? >> well, i think two ways. first, going all the way back to the '94 midterm elections. there was this story in the aftermath that credited the nra with the election of republicans and newt gingrich as speaker because they supported the assault weapons ban in 1994. the assault weapons ban was wildly popular in 1994. supported by ronald reagan and that actually wasn't the reason why democrats lost. it was an unpopular president and the disastrous health care debate. but that methology has carried

forward. i think today part of the reason is that the nra has been very good at, you know, sort of having their endorsement stand for something more than just your position on guns. the nra endorsement, you know, kind of means to republicans that you are a true conservative. and their ability to get their stamp of approval to be kind of a proxy for a broader set of conservative values i think has elevated the importance of that organization within the republican party infrastructure. >> senator murphy, thanks so much for your time. fascinating conversation. you've got to run, but i want to make sure you come back at some point. we'll continue to talk about this issue during the 11:00 hour. another tax cut according to multiple reports. that's one of the options that the white house is considering amid concerns of a possible economic slow down. is it a sign that the president is getting nervous despite what he said just a few days ago. >> i don't think we have a recession. we're doing tremendously well. our consumers are rich. i gave a tremendous tax cut and

they're loaded up with money. that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ announcer: fidelity is redefining value with zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. billions of problems. sore gums? bleeding gums? painful flossing? there's a therabreath for you. therabreath healthy gums oral rinse fights gingivitis and plaque and prevents gum disease for 24 hours. so you can... breathe easy,

there's therabreath at walmart.

in white house meetings that no named sources were publicly acknowledged, senior officials are considering a bold move to

put money into the economy to stall a possible slowdown, that's according to "washington post" who sources say the administration is eyeing a payroll tax to cut, a payroll tax cut to boost paychecks for working americans. part of a rapid ly evolving effort by the white house to exude confidence. told nbc that cutting payroll taxes is not under consideration at this moment. i want to bring in "usa today" susan page, she's back with me. also with me, "new york times" politics reporter jeremy peters and josh, business columnist for "new york magazine" also joining the fun here. the president tweeted our economy is in the best shape of the world his chief economic adviser, kellyanne conway said

the fundamentals of our economy are strong. is the white house even exploring another economic crunch. what does it say about this administration's true perception of the economy some. >> i think they're scared. we're not certainly heading into a recession. bank of america said maybe one in three chance of a recession in the next year. i think they on some level understand that. they're nervous about the idea that the economy might experience significant weakness and might need a response to that. president trump is very sensitive about saying anything publicly that would suggest weakness in the economy. you get this weirdness and you see it in the twitter feed. out there saying the economy is so strong, the media is trying to make the economy look bad to make me look bad conspiracy by democrats, et cetera. the next tweet is saying the federal reserve should cut interest rates which are things you do when the economy is under serious threat and needs a boost. the problem, if the white house intends to pursue a fiscal

stimulus policy like this, a payroll tax cut whose purpose would be to prop up the economy. they would have to admit the economy needs propping up. he would have to do that in a sustained manner to get a bill like that through congress. that is even harder than leaning on the federal reserve. the economy would have to weaken significantly to get the white house in a position where it would be willing to admit it feels like the payroll tax cut would be needed. >> jeremy, the best thing that the president has going for him as we head into election season. new poll out that shows by a slim margin 49 to 46% more americans approve of the way president trump handled the economy. the argument can be made easily that a payroll tax cut would help working class americans. from a political standpoint, is it a smart, political move? >> it could be. i think that they're a long ways off from deciding whether or not to do this. i think that it really shows you

how far the republican party has come since the days of the tea party when deficits were what political leaders and voters said they cared about the most. if you were to pass a payroll tax cut especially when the economy is contracting, that would add to the deficit in an extraordinary way and you already have the country approaching trillion dollar deficits which is about where we were at the depths of the reception. it's squus kind just kind of uno think where it ended where the tea party movement took off. i think president trump in talking to people around him views the economy as he views everything else. personally. it's a personal reflection on him. he's been going around telling people that jerome powell is, quote, wrecking my economy. he thinks the fed chairman because of his reluctance to cut rates to where the president wants them to be is harming his

prospect for re-election. he is going around and assigning the blame and lashing out as we have seen him do time and time again. whether or not that manifests itself into a policy initiative like a payroll tax cut, i think we're quite a ways off from that. >> jeremy, while i have you, i want to ask you about something else that came out a couple moments ago. some new figures here. new figures that are connected to the re-election effort that we've been talking about. the rnc, the republican national committee just announced it has raised nearly $21 million. they raised it in july alone bringing the total raise so far this cycle to more than $117 million. that is an astounding amount of cash for the rnc. how do they plan to use it? can democrats counter it? jeremy. >> oh, i'm sorry, i thought you were talking to susan. i mean, look, i think where we

are right now is this president his poll numbers are really independent of the economy. this has pin true ever since he was elected. the normal political rules of gravity don't apply to him. now, of course, in an expanding economy, it is very different once the economy starts shrinking if, indeed, it does. it will be interesting to see whether or not president trump's core base of supporters hang on and whether or not they say, all right, we've given him enough of a shot. the tariffs have been hurting us and now this is just too much. i think they have shown an unusual, unique willingness to withstand economic pain to vote against really their own interests in a lot of ways because they like the idea of what president trump represents to them. i think it's a much different case if the economy starts to contract. >> susan, this morning the

president doing this. he's inclined to do retweeted this fox news story suggesting that democrats are embracing this idea of a recession as a strategy for a win in 2020. saying, quote, despite all of their will and energy, it won't work. susan, what do we know about what democrats are actually doing to poke a hole in the president's perceived strength on the economy? >> well, one thing democrats have been doing from the start is talking about those who are not benefiting from the very robust economic recovery that we had. it's true that americans, some americans have done a lot better than other americans with this good economy. you do hear a lot of democrats expressing concern about the prospect of a recession and, of course, political component to this conversation because it would be so damaging for the president's political prospects if we, in fact, head into a recession. you know, if the white house is concerned about trying to avoid a recession, they are not going

to get a payroll tax cut through the democratic house. that is a tax that pays for social security and medicare. what the white house could do is try to get a trade deal with china because the lack of a trade deal, the concern about that, the turbulence over that is certainly one of the things that is unsettled business interest in others. >> you agree? >> i think that's right, but i think the trade is a rare issue that president trump had a basically consistent position on for decades. he's always been a protectionist and one thing he believes at his core is that international trade is bad for the u.s. economy, especially when we run trade deficits with other countries. he is reluctant to accept the idea that china trade policy is bad for the u.s. economy, even if he can see it causes short-term hiccups. i think he believes this is what the country needs and attached to it as a policy. as susan points out, issues about how it funds social security and medicare. when there was a stimulus measure back in the beginning of

the recovery. >> under the obama administration. >> they structured it to say we can make the trust fund whole you can do something around that. but difficulty building a coalition in congress around it because republicans do not love republican tax cuts. they love tax cuts aimed at capital. the idea is that encourages businesses to invest and grow and, frankly, their donor base consists of high earners because the payroll tax only applies to $127,000 of income. that means a lot to middle income people and it does not mean a lot to you if you're a billionaire. not something you'll find tremendous enthusiasm and democrats wouldn't want to give president a win. it is something he would have to go out and sell and to sell it the economy is going to be in deep trouble if you do this. he does not want to say his economy will be in deep trouble. >> it sounds like you're saying, josh, it might be good politics,

but bad policy. >> well, i think it's both bad politics and policy. the politics of selling it through this congress would require the president to make a bunch of public statements about the economy that he doesn't want to make. >> josh barro, thank you. planned parenthood joining in line with the trump administration. the major change that could affect more than a million women nationwide and potentially take away their access of birth control. why a missile just tested by the pentagon is raising those concerns this morning. se c now just $15.99. or crack into a pound of wild-caught snow crab. now only $19.99. grab your crab crew. crabfest ends september 1st. sir, you're a broker. what do you charge for online equity trades? uh, i'll look into it. (phone rings) lisa jones! lisa: (on phone) hey carl, what are you charging me

for online equity trades? (nervous chuckle) lisa: and do i get my fees back if i'm not happy? like a satisfaction guarantee? ugh. schwab! lisa: oh right, i'm calling schwab. thanks, carl! wait, lisa! lisa... are you getting low costs backed by a satisfaction guarantee? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. ♪ if not, talk to schwab. [horn honks] man this is what i feel like when i wear regular shoes, cramped and uncomfortable. we can arrange a little upgrade. which is why i wear skechers... wide fit shoes. they have extra room throughout. they're like a luxury ride for my feet. try skechers wide fit shoes. they're like a luxury ride for my feet. announcer: only fidelity offers four zero expense ratio index funds directly to investors. and we have zero account fees for brokerage accounts. at fidelity those zeros really add up.

♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes? try dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. with 3x more grease cleaning power per drop,

it tackles tough grease on a variety of surfaces. try dawn ultra. who got an awful skin condition. with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis, you feel like you're itching all the time. and you never know how your skin will look. because deep within your skin an overly sensitive immune system could be the cause. so help heal your skin from within, with dupixent. dupixent is not a steroid, and it continuously treats your eczema even when you can't see it. at 16 weeks, nearly four times more patients taking dupixent saw clear or almost clear skin compared to those not taking it, and patients saw a significant reduction in itch. do not use if you are allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur, including anaphylaxis, a severe reaction. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems, including eye pain or changes in vision. if you are taking asthma medicines, do not change or stop your asthma medicine without talking to your doctor. help heal your skin from within.

ask your eczema specialist about dupixent. planned parenthood joined a big line to fight back against the trump administration. it says it will flat out turn down millions of dollars in federal funds and it's all because of a new rule that will block it from providing referrals for patients who receive abortions. i want to bring in nbc jane tim and back with me emily. jane, for folks who have not been following this story as closely, big picture. walk us through the trump administration rule. walk us through planned parenthood's response. >> let's start with title ten. came out in 1970 because women were having more babies than they wanted to. it had bipartisan support and it does not fund abortions, it funds counseling and funds birth control and it funds well women visits. the trump administration has

said referring someone to an abortion to an abortion provider is not okay to receive that money. planned parenthood said essentially we're not going to draw that line. we're not going to give our patients the information. they're legally entitled to get with this program. so, they're leaving $60 million on the table. >> 60. 6-0. >> 60. >> do we think planned parenthood will be able to recoup those losses? >> they're going to try. state governments move money around and private donations trying to get in there. 1.5 million people depend on this program every year for their health care needs. even if they're going to try to make that money back up, this is a big amount of money. >> i want to read part of the planned parenthood statement and they responded in part, quote, the trump administration gag rule will reverberate across the country. this reality will hit hardest people struggling to make ends meet. so, yes, this trump

administration will limit the organization, but planned par t parenthood's own decision to turn down the money does that perhaps negatively impact patients who really can't afford to be negatively impacted. >> i think that is certainly what the administration is trying to claim. it is planned parenthood turning down the money. but planned parenthood being responsible and being the best providers they possibly can be. there is a political conversation i think particularly in washington planned parenthood can feel like a political football but on the ground particularly in rural communities and underserved communities, that is not the reality. in many cases, planned parenthood is the only provider in so many communities, particularly rural. and under title ten funding they actually see 40% of the patients that get this title ten funding. so, a lot of people go to planned parenthood and they know it as their well visits and know it as their primary health care provider. for them to feel like they can't go in and get all the access on

the table is not true to the access planned parenthood is providing. >> one of the things that came out of the 2018 mid-term elections suburban women, suburban women, suburban women. really lost suburban women. is this the kind of thing that perhaps reverberates in 2020? is this the kind of issue that galvanizes democratic voters? >> not just democratic voters. it galvanizes independent voters to swing democratic. galvanizes republican suburban women to vote democratic. many did break for trump in 2016 and congressional candidates in 2018. one of the experts on my pod cast has been doing interviews with republican suburban women who had voted for trump. what she said she's hearing from them is that they actually never thought abortion would be on the table in this way. they never thought they would lose the right. they were willing to vote for candidates who would chip away at it. now, they're really feeling the threat for the first time.

>> they wanted some restrictions. they didn't want this many restrictions. >> this is far more than they were willing to go. >> jane timm, is the money gone forever but a situation in the new administration this is the kind of funding that gets restored? >> i think this is the kind of funding that gets restored. funding for the most vel nrbl people who need health care and health care is one of the issues that democrats like to win on and have won on in the past. while trump is trying to make this a social issue, this is also a health care issue and i think it's easy to put this one back by rescinding this rule because it's not a congressional thing. money exists in this pot for title ten funding. it will just go to different, crisis centers who weren't more eligible for this kind of funding previously and they are it ones that won't give you the option of abortion. whose stated goal to keep women who are pregnant, pregnant.

>> is this not the kind of rule that can be challenged in court? >> the effect is immediate and you see planned parenthood pulling out. their acting president said women may see delays and a lack of services. >> there is a current challenge by about 20 organizations including planned parenthood to keep this from going into effect and the three-judge panel just allowed the rule to go into effect while the legal challenge is happening. two of those three judges, trump-appointed judges. one of the biggest legacies will be the amount of pro-choice judges they put in positions. >> thank you, thank you. growing alarm over a possible new arms race this morning. why the pentagon's missile test this weekend is raising new concerns, especially when it comes to timing. is redefining value with zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win

♪ saved by zero

and with new features and richer stories,d you're from. it can lead you on an unexpected journey... ...that brings you closer to home... it's only $59 to discover your heritage... so instead of telling stories of where you went... ...you can tell the story of where you come from. get your dna kit (now) for just $59 at ancestry.com.

new pepto diarrhea to the rescue. diarrhea? its three times concentrated liquid formula coats and kills bacteria to relieve diarrhea. the leading competitor only treats symptoms. it does nothing to kill the bacteria.

treat diarrhea at its source with new pepto diarrhea. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. the united states is testing a new missile and also testing its relationship with russia. just weeks ago this launch off the coast of california would have been banned under a treaty with russia. the trump administration withdrew from that cold air war treaty with russia and it's sparking some new concerns about a potential arms race. i want to bring in courtney who,

of course, covers national security in the pentagon and kevin barrett, executive editor of defense one. court courtney, let me start with you. what russia responded? >> so as you said, this occurred on sunday in california. it was basically a tactical tomahawk so the kinds of missiles that we frequently see launching from u.s. navy ships into places like syria, into libya and whatnot. this was the -- essentially the ground launch version of that. it flew in excess of 500 kilometers which is why it's the kind of missile at that range that would have been a violation of the inf treaty before the u.s. officially withdrew from that on august 2nd. august has criticized and condemned this launch saying that it proves that in fact the united states had planned to not only withdraw from the treaty but had been working of on their development and research and development of their medium range ground launch cruise missiles even while they were still part of the treaty.

it's important to note that the inf treaty specifically it barred not just the deployment of these kinds of missiles but also the development of them and having any of them in their stockpiles at all. that's what the u.s. said that russia has been in violation of for a number of years but the u.s. maintained in fact they had not been researched, developing or holding any of these in their stockpile. >> what's the time line? >> it's very similar to what we would see launched from the navy ship. it's a conventional missile so it's not nuclear powered or any kind of a nuclear warhead on it. it is very accurate missile. these ones i don't know exactly how long these would have the potential to fly. but the one that they tested yesterday the military said that it hit the target and it flew over 500 kilometers. >> kevin, on a scale of one to ten, how concerned are you about the possibility of a new arms race? >> good question. i think it depends on what your definition of arms race is. what i mean is there's a lot of

fear about what the administration's intentions are to try to counter what russia has already done. so russia has developed a missile that is along the border of europe already. that is -- you know, the main thing that the trump administration pointed to say, you see russians have been in violation of this treaty. therefore, it's ridiculous that we, you know, adhere to it. we need to pull out and develop our own. the fact is that the united states and nato don't have missile defenses like interceptors that can shoot down fast flying cruise missiles like underan icbm, so according to the trump administration is deference. especially the army wants to develop the own arsenal of similar missiles and the other excuse is that china has been developing new missiles for years, that's the way they're pushing the u.s. ships off of show. that's their answer for any

conflict with taiwan and they want to deter or counter china. whether or not it's an arms race, if the two countries -- especially the united states starts to build a large mass of these, then perhaps. but they're continue the development of the kind of missiles then it's hard to call it an arms race as much it might be matching deterrents. >> the pentagon's announcement it also hinted that this might be the beginning of -- part of that announcement here from the -- again this is from pentagon. data collected and lessons learned from this test will inform the department of defense's development of future intermediate range capabilities. what do you glean there, kevin, in terms of the pentagon's plan here both in the short term and the long term? >> so the pentagon's future missile -- the name is prism. it's the tomahawk with a faster engine so it can loiter in the air longer and strike beyond the

500 kilometer perimeter. the worry -- from what the russians have or chinese is whether or not to put a nuclear weapon on that. and the fact is that the united states or nato wouldn't know if a fast flying cruise missile from russia is nuclear armed or not until frankly it hit so the response has to be about overwhelming missile retaliation that can hit their mobile launchers as they're known. and the u.s. is saying now we can live test these things we'll come up with the best missiles that we can and the most amount of them to deter russian -- the russians from using them. i think a bigger concern to be seen more than this test is what nato collectively is going to be able to do to prevent the russian army from not just, you know, an attack of flying these, but even positioning them or threatening to use them in the first place because the real worry is not using them against the united states, but against europe. this treaty was designed to protect europe and it did for decades. >> do you get the sense at the pentagon that there will be

another test like this pretty soon? >> absolutely. i don't know how soon it will be, but they'll absolutely continue to develop this capability. i mean, they're openly saying that that they will. >> thank you both. thank you. coming up, new york city mayor and presidential candidate bill de blasio will join my colleague andrea mitchell. they'll talk about the firing of the officer involved in the eric garner case, daniel pantaleo, and of course the presidential race as well. wellindex funds directly to investors. and we have zero account fees for brokerage accounts. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero

from the 5am wakers, to the 6am sleepers. everyone uses their phone differently and in different places. that's why xfinity mobile created a wireless network that auto connects you to millions of secure wifi hot spots. and the best lte everywhere else. xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. click, call or visit a store today.

so new uncertainty in one of europe's largest economies. italian prime minister conte just announced that he is resigning. conte has been under pressure since his own interior minister called for a new confidence vote against him this month. in the last hour he said he'll hand in his resignation to the president today. the president will then have to decide if he wants to call early elections or try to put together -- form a new coalition. again, some developing news overseas in europe as the prime minister of italy has resigned. that is going to wrap up this hour of "msnbc live." see you tomorrow morning on "today." but for now, andrea mitchell reports. >> thank you. on "andrea mitchell reports" -- head versus heart. new poll numbers out today showing a shakeup behind the

democratic front-runner. but joe biden is still on top along with his wife jill's blunt assessment of the horse race. >> he's leading all the other candidates. so yes, you know, i -- you know, your candidate might be better on i don't know health care than joe is, but you have to look at whose going to win this election. fired up. after russian cheating, the u.s. tests a cruise missile banned for decades under a cold war treaty signed by ronald reagan and mikhail gorbachev. is this the start of a nuclear arms race? >> i don't see an arms race happening. it was the russians who forcedous out of oit and we remained compliant up until the final day. and planned parenthood gives up federal funding after refusing to comply with a gag order against abortion counseling. >> by imposing this on the